• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Question 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dies-l

Guest
Less than complete? Jesus defined it as "where two or three are gathered in my name".

I don't think that Jesus ever mentioned "the church". He certainly didn't in the verse you are talking about. He said that he would be with them, but he didn't call it a "church".


Nobody ever said there had to be more, or that one of the two had to be a priest or ruler of some kind.


And, neither did I.

In a community where there are more than two or three believers, Paul did set up a plurality of elders (spiritually mature) to serve as model believers and guard against false teachings.

So, he set up an organizational structure. My point exactly.

The "double honor" they were to receive was in respect and the need for more than flippant charges brought against them if they are suspected of wrongdoing. But there is another side to that coin: such elders, if found to be sinning, were to be publicly rebuked as a warning to others. That is, where there is double honor, there is also double shame. If, as some wish, we take it to refer to a salary, then where is the stipulation as to amount, and who gets "single honor"?

The context specifically references "wages" and the phrase "do not muzzle the ox while he is treading grain" refers to paying those who labor for you.
Both expressions refer directly to providing for the pastor and his family. Paul also says, "the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel". Now, there is nothing in Scripture that tells us the amount. But, I think that general principles of leadership spelled out in Scripture provide plenty of guidance.

Acts never shows organization beyond the spiritually mature guiding the less mature. Not one person is ever identified as a "pastor". There is not one guideline or rule about who gets what salary. There is no chain of command in the Body of Christ.

Who said anything about "chain of command"? I said that there is evidence throughout the NT of an organized church structure.

The offering was not for him! Though there were a few instances where people sent him aid, he never demanded it and in fact explicitly refused to take it from those who were in more need than he, or who were his spiritual "children". I defy you to show chapter and verse where any offering went to church leaders just because they were church leaders. Chapter and verse.

And, I defy you to show me where I ever said that "offerings should go to church leaders just because they are church leaders." I think that if a church community wants to provide for its pastor, because they want to have a pastor who is available to serve it on a full-time basis, then they are free to do that. If you do not want to be part of a church with a full time paid pastor, then you are free to find a church that doesn't pay its pastor.

Why are you still saying this after it's been pointed out that Paul never sets up "pastors" as office holders that are to be paid salaries, and after that whole section about "equality" as the purpose of all our giving? It's about NEEDS for survival, not a nice middle-class western lifestyle.

It has been pointed out that Paul clearly does provide for the compensation of those charged with leading the church, and those people are called in modern language "pastors".

"Tithing" is legalism; "giving" is grace.

A tithe is nothing more than a tenth. It can be a tenth of one's crops. It can be a tenth of one's income. It can be a tenth of the spoils of war. The word tithe simply means tenth. If I choose to give 10% of my [income, savings, crops, etc.] to some other person or group, then I have giving a tithe. There is nothing inherently legalistic about this. If I do it because I believe I must, then that is legalism.

It is equally legalistic to insist that pastors must not be paid, because you can't find a verse that specifically demands that they be paid.


And this differs from anything I've said, how exactly?

It doesn't. You expressed offense over something I said, and I was trying to explain what I mean and why I didn't mean for it to be offensive.

There is not even a hint of "ought" for tithing. There is only "give willingly and not under compulsion",

I would generally agree with this, except that I would say that the principles of giving throughout the Bible hint toward some form of regular and substantial giving as a sound spiritual practice.

and for the purpose of helping those who are in need of food and shelter, so that if the tables ever turn then the giving can go the other way.

Giving to those who are in need is certainly commended in Scripture. However, nothing in Scripture indicates that this is to be the only purpose for giving. That much is your own added commentary, and I don't see that it stands up to the scrutiny of Scripture.

If we are saved and practicing the love of God, there is no need to be lectured on any sort of charitable giving.

If we are saved and practicing the love of God, we are generally not criticizing those who choose to give generously to their local church and we are not complaining about pastors receiving a fair wage for the work they do.

Thank you for your judgmental opinion. And I am not lying about my own experiences, which many, many others share.

I never accused you of lying. I accused you of having an incorrect opinion, and you have been accusing me of the same.

You are still mixing "tithing" and "giving" and trying to turn my argument into something it never was. I won't play this anymore, we are not communicating.

I am not doing any such thing. I have explained that tithing is a loaded word that really only means "giving of one tenth." But, I am trying to understand what you are objecting to: the idea of tithing as a legal obligation, or the idea of giving a tenth of one's income because one wants to. You seem to be saying that there is no reason that believers should give any amount to any church institution, except perhaps for the direct purpose of providing for the poor. I suspect that you would oppose a voluntary giving campaign for a building program or to repair the parsonage or to enhance the children's ministry. And, if that is your position, I would disagree with you, whether we use the word "tithe" or the word "give."
 
Upvote 0

2thePoint

Looking Up
May 19, 2005
752
87
Visit site
✟31,321.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't think that Jesus ever mentioned "the church". He certainly didn't in the verse you are talking about. He said that he would be with them, but he didn't call it a "church".
Then what did "church" mean in Mat. 18? And if Jesus didn't talk about the church, then there is no significance for the church in choosing 12 males for his inner circle either. You can't have it both ways.


And, neither did I.
You gave the impression that you thought I did.


So, he set up an organizational structure. My point exactly.
No. The key word here is "organizational", and he did no such thing. There is no chain of command. Instead, the church is likened to a body: one substance with various parts, differentiated only by spiritual gifting as determined not by us but by the Holy Spirit. Remember what Paul said about treating the "less presentable" parts with "greater honor"? He was painting a picture of equality, unity, and interdependence... NOT hierarchy with some parts usurping authority over other parts. The Holy Spirit is quite capable of leading this Body.



The context specifically references "wages" and the phrase "do not muzzle the ox while he is treading grain" refers to paying those who labor for you.
Both expressions refer directly to providing for the pastor and his family. Paul also says, "the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel". Now, there is nothing in Scripture that tells us the amount. But, I think that general principles of leadership spelled out in Scripture provide plenty of guidance.
No. As I explained, no sense can be made out of "double honor" without specifying "single honor". And what happened to the vaunted "plain reading" method here? It says honor, not money. And it is paired with dishonor. If something is commanded there must be a clear command, and you admit that no such command exists for saying that this alleged wage or salary is beyond the mutual charity among all believers. Paul made tents to support himself; can any "pastor" do less?


Who said anything about "chain of command"? I said that there is evidence throughout the NT of an organized church structure.
So you accept a structure without hierarchy? Great! That's what the Body is. The parts are different but not subservient to other parts. All submission is mutual.


And, I defy you to show me where I ever said that "offerings should go to church leaders just because they are church leaders."
Look back at all your statements so far arguing for wages for pastors. You make this argument in every comment.


I think that if a church community wants to provide for its pastor, because they want to have a pastor who is available to serve it on a full-time basis, then they are free to do that. If you do not want to be part of a church with a full time paid pastor, then you are free to find a church that doesn't pay its pastor.
There is no "THE pastor"; pastor is one of many spiritual gifts. There is no THE elder but several. But I have already agreed that those who want to run a club or business are free to do so; it just isn't supportable by scripture. I am part of The Church, the Body of Christ, no matter where I go.



It has been pointed out that Paul clearly does provide for the compensation of those charged with leading the church, and those people are called in modern language "pastors".
No, it has not. Considering the totality of Paul's teachings, he is saying that like Jesus did (Phil. 2:5-11), we all must lay any privilege aside and become the lowest of servants. As Jesus also modeled at the Last Supper and taught the disciples who were fighting over who should be the greatest, the leaders of the church are not found at the helm wearing pressed uniforms, but on the lowest deck chained to oars.


A tithe is nothing more than a tenth. It can be a tenth of one's crops. It can be a tenth of one's income.
There is not one teaching or example in all of scripture, OT or NT, that commands tithing on one's income; it was always on either crops or livestock. That's all. And it was mostly consumed by the people who gave it, as has already been posted.


If I choose to give 10% of my [income, savings, crops, etc.] to some other person or group, then I have giving a tithe. There is nothing inherently legalistic about this. If I do it because I believe I must, then that is legalism.
You keep equivocating on the word "tithe". You know very well that in this thread it means "a command to pay 1/10th of one's income". We have gone around on this several times already.


It is equally legalistic to insist that pastors must not be paid, because you can't find a verse that specifically demands that they be paid.
So now it's legalistic to object to legalism?? Wow.


It doesn't. You expressed offense over something I said, and I was trying to explain what I mean and why I didn't mean for it to be offensive.
Why are you talking about offense here?



I would generally agree with this, except that I would say that the principles of giving throughout the Bible hint toward some form of regular and substantial giving as a sound spiritual practice.
Anything commanded of course would require more than a mere hint. But how much and how often people give depends entirely on the Holy Spirit and the person, not a calendar or calculator. Remember that giving is so that the needy can be given aid, and that this does not always flow in one direction.



Giving to those who are in need is certainly commended in Scripture. However, nothing in Scripture indicates that this is to be the only purpose for giving. That much is your own added commentary, and I don't see that it stands up to the scrutiny of Scripture.
You're arguing from silence.



If we are saved and practicing the love of God, we are generally not criticizing those who choose to give generously to their local church and we are not complaining about pastors receiving a fair wage for the work they do.
Lather, rinse, repeat...



I never accused you of lying. I accused you of having an incorrect opinion, and you have been accusing me of the same.
If I tell you I experienced something and you tell me that's "incorrect", that's an accusation of lying.


I am not doing any such thing. I have explained that tithing is a loaded word that really only means "giving of one tenth."
And I have explained that "tithe" IS a loaded word that Christians use to mean more than merely "ten percent of something"; they mean "the law says you must tithe".


But, I am trying to understand what you are objecting to: the idea of tithing as a legal obligation, or the idea of giving a tenth of one's income because one wants to.
I can't imagine how I've been anything less than crystal clear about this.


I suspect that you would oppose...
When the conversation devolves into this "I bet you would" level, it's over.
 
Upvote 0

mr73140

Beloved
Jul 5, 2011
126
14
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟22,848.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Oh sorry, I thought you refered me to the passage of the Bible that talked about robbing God because you thought that was important. Although I believe when you know the truth, it sets you free, it's not for everyone.

I AM FREE. IT IS IMPORTANT...NEOT TO ROB GOD...IN MY OPINION. ALTHOUGH I WILL NOT ARGUE THE TRUTH. HAVE YOU HEARD OF "CASTING YOUR PEARLS. BEFORE SWINE"? THAT'S HOW I FEEL PARTICIPATING IN THIS PARTICULAR THREAD. SO NOW I WILL SHAKE THE DUST FROM MY FEET AND MOVE ON. BE BLESSED.
 
Upvote 0
D

dies-l

Guest
Then what did "church" mean in Mat. 18? And if Jesus didn't talk about the church, then there is no significance for the church in choosing 12 males for his inner circle either. You can't have it both ways.



You gave the impression that you thought I did.



No. The key word here is "organizational", and he did no such thing. There is no chain of command. Instead, the church is likened to a body: one substance with various parts, differentiated only by spiritual gifting as determined not by us but by the Holy Spirit. Remember what Paul said about treating the "less presentable" parts with "greater honor"? He was painting a picture of equality, unity, and interdependence... NOT hierarchy with some parts usurping authority over other parts. The Holy Spirit is quite capable of leading this Body.




No. As I explained, no sense can be made out of "double honor" without specifying "single honor". And what happened to the vaunted "plain reading" method here? It says honor, not money. And it is paired with dishonor. If something is commanded there must be a clear command, and you admit that no such command exists for saying that this alleged wage or salary is beyond the mutual charity among all believers. Paul made tents to support himself; can any "pastor" do less?



So you accept a structure without hierarchy? Great! That's what the Body is. The parts are different but not subservient to other parts. All submission is mutual.



Look back at all your statements so far arguing for wages for pastors. You make this argument in every comment.



There is no "THE pastor"; pastor is one of many spiritual gifts. There is no THE elder but several. But I have already agreed that those who want to run a club or business are free to do so; it just isn't supportable by scripture. I am part of The Church, the Body of Christ, no matter where I go.




No, it has not. Considering the totality of Paul's teachings, he is saying that like Jesus did (Phil. 2:5-11), we all must lay any privilege aside and become the lowest of servants. As Jesus also modeled at the Last Supper and taught the disciples who were fighting over who should be the greatest, the leaders of the church are not found at the helm wearing pressed uniforms, but on the lowest deck chained to oars.



There is not one teaching or example in all of scripture, OT or NT, that commands tithing on one's income; it was always on either crops or livestock. That's all. And it was mostly consumed by the people who gave it, as has already been posted.



You keep equivocating on the word "tithe". You know very well that in this thread it means "a command to pay 1/10th of one's income". We have gone around on this several times already.



So now it's legalistic to object to legalism?? Wow.



Why are you talking about offense here?




Anything commanded of course would require more than a mere hint. But how much and how often people give depends entirely on the Holy Spirit and the person, not a calendar or calculator. Remember that giving is so that the needy can be given aid, and that this does not always flow in one direction.




You're arguing from silence.




Lather, rinse, repeat...




If I tell you I experienced something and you tell me that's "incorrect", that's an accusation of lying.



And I have explained that "tithe" IS a loaded word that Christians use to mean more than merely "ten percent of something"; they mean "the law says you must tithe".



I can't imagine how I've been anything less than crystal clear about this.



When the conversation devolves into this "I bet you would" level, it's over.

You seem to be reading into my comments something that is not intended. Perhaps, I have done the same to you. But, whatever the reason, you're right that we don't seem to be communicating here. I am sorry that you found my comments offensive or insulting. I did not intend them to be. However, from what I have gathered from this conversation, I will say that it appears that I disagree firmly with both your beliefs regarding giving and your basic beliefs on ecclesiology. So, it goes.

God bless.
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,549
28,532
75
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,330.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
You know, it really doesn't matter who God was talking to or about when He said "I the Lord do not change." It's the sort of statement that niggles and sticks whether we like it or not. :)
:thumbsup: :bow:

Hebrew 1:10 and Thou according to beginnings Lord! the land found and works of the hands of Thee are the heavens
11 they shall be perishing. Thou yet are remaining and all as a garment shall be being aged
12 and as-if a clothing Thou shall be rolling-up them as a cloak, and they shall be being changed
Thou yet the same are and the years of Thee not shall be lacking/failing".
[Psalm 102:25-27/Reve 6:14]
 
Upvote 0

Jerushabelle

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
3,244
584
✟6,072.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
A New Testament support for "I the Lord do not change" and the necessity to look to ALL of God's word for our guidance is found in Ephesians.

"As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit -- just as you were called to one hope when you were called -- one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all."

This Scripture goes on to reveal more regarding what is being discussed here in this thread:

"But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. This is why it says: 'When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men.' (What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions? He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.) It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work."

This word of God through Paul clearly identifies Jesus as the Head or as another here stated, High Priest, but it also identifies the various callings by Jesus Himself one of which is Pastor or the Greek "poimen" which means shepherd. Does the flock belong to the Pastor? No, the flock was bought and paid for by Jesus. But the Pastor is a worker within the Body of Christ (God's people) and he tends and teaches Jesus' flock. It's interesting to note the phrase "to prepare God's people for works of service." In other words, God's people are the flock whom Jesus bought and paid for and those who are called have the responsibility of preparing God's people to be workers, "supporting ligament" of the whole Body. Does that mean we are not all called? No. It means that some have been greater tasks than others, as Jesus saw fit to apportion.

As to what a Pastor serving a flock receives in the way of compensation, the word of God through Paul addresses in 1 Corinthians 9. Paul states that there are certain rights to those who have received specific callings. Paul was a called apostle of Jesus. The Body in Corinth was the seal of his apostleship in the Lord. "Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk? Do I say this merely from a human point of view?"

***Uh oh folks, now see what Paul looks to for direction.***

"Doesn't the Law say something? For it is written in the Law of Moses;" (That's God's Law people!) "'Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.' Is it about oxen that God is concerned? Surely he says this for us, doesn't he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the threasher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? If others have this right of support from you, shouldn't we have it all the more?"

Now, if Jesus' chosen apostle looks to the Law for direction and declares that God meant it for those living after the death of Jesus, that then means that ALL of God's word is applicable to us, not just that which was recorded in the New Testament and certainly God's Law is applicable to us, though no longer for our salvation. Hence, Malachi 9, wherein God states that He does not change and He calls His people to give tithes and offerings and then graciously allows us to test Him. What do we do people? Do we throw His grace back in His face? Do we tell Jesus He has no right to apportion certain tasks to some or that we don't like His apportionments? Guess that's all kinda sorta up to the individual. As for me and my house....
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Svt4Him

Legend
Site Supporter
Oct 23, 2003
16,711
1,132
55
Visit site
✟121,118.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I AM FREE. IT IS IMPORTANT...NEOT TO ROB GOD...IN MY OPINION. ALTHOUGH I WILL NOT ARGUE THE TRUTH. HAVE YOU HEARD OF "CASTING YOUR PEARLS. BEFORE SWINE"? THAT'S HOW I FEEL PARTICIPATING IN THIS PARTICULAR THREAD. SO NOW I WILL SHAKE THE DUST FROM MY FEET AND MOVE ON. BE BLESSED.

Amazingly rude. You brought up a verse, and when I addressed that verse you get all "I'm all dogmatic therefore not teachable" then you call me swine? That's how you give an answer for the hope in you? And you don't need to argue truth, truth is truth. If what you mean to say is you can't argue your position, then you go dust off your feet and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
 
Upvote 0

Svt4Him

Legend
Site Supporter
Oct 23, 2003
16,711
1,132
55
Visit site
✟121,118.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Now for my position on certain items, again I say what does the Bible say?

22Thou shalt truly tithe all the increase of thy seed, that the field bringeth forth year by year.

Seed, not money

23And thou shalt eat before the LORD thy God, in the place which he shall choose to place his name there, the tithe of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the firstlings of thy herds and of thy flocks; that thou mayest learn to fear the LORD thy God always.

Do what with the tithe?

24And if the way be too long for thee, so that thou art not able to carry it; or if the place be too far from thee, which the LORD thy God shall choose to set his name there, when the LORD thy God hath blessed thee:
25Then shalt thou turn it into money, and bind up the money in thine hand, and shalt go unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose:

26And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household,

This is the only time money is mentioned, but notice it is not money you bring, it is only for when you can't bring your grain or cattle, you sell it, then go rebuy it, bring it...and eat it!


27And the Levite that is within thy gates; thou shalt not forsake him; for he hath no part nor inheritance with thee.

Levite and pastor are not the same thing.

28At the end of three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates:
29And the Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee,) and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest.
 
Upvote 0

2thePoint

Looking Up
May 19, 2005
752
87
Visit site
✟31,321.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You can't post that often enough, Svt4Him. It's a great passage also on the issue of alcoholic beverages-- even strong ones! There's just no avoiding the fact that the tithe was to be used for the benefit of the tithers in a feast before God, and to feed those who had no means of feeding themselves because they had no land and cattle and crops. Funny how the OT is fine when quoting a snippet of Malachi, but not Deuteronomy.
 
Upvote 0
D

dies-l

Guest
Amazingly rude. You brought up a verse, and when I addressed that verse you get all "I'm all dogmatic therefore not teachable" then you call me swine? That's how you give an answer for the hope in you? And you don't need to argue truth, truth is truth. If what you mean to say is you can't argue your position, then you go dust off your feet and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

In all fairness, I see how you took it that way, but I don't think that the other poster was calling you swine. Rather, it seems he was referring to a passage in the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus cautioned followers not to argue their position as nauseum. There comes a point in every discussion where you have to acknowledge that no amount of arguing is going to convince the other person.

Personally, I don't agree with either of you. I think that to say that we "must" do anything, lest we be "robbing God" is not the way that we are called to live. I also believe that to say that we "must not" do something (e.g., tithe) lest we be bound by legalism is itself a form of legalism.

I would take a third position: If you want to tithe to the local church, then tithe. If you want to give more than a tithe, then give more than a tithe. If you want to give less than a tithe, then give less than a tithe. If you want to give nothing, then give nothing. However, if one is a Christian who finds generosity to be difficult, then that person should bring that issue to God in prayer and ask for a more generous and trusting heart. If one is a Christian who finds that they are cynical about the workings of the church, then that person should take their cynicism to God in prayer and ask that it be removed from them. And, so on. And, generally, I find that when a person is right with God, then generosity, faithfulness, and trust naturally flow out that person and that stinginess, fear, and cynicism generally disappear.
 
Upvote 0

Svt4Him

Legend
Site Supporter
Oct 23, 2003
16,711
1,132
55
Visit site
✟121,118.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
And where have I said anything that disagrees with you regarding giving? If you eye is dark, the whole body will be dark.

As for the swine, there is actually two references the poster was making. One regarding casting important things before pigs, another in regards to telling the disciples that if they find they aren't welcomed in a town, to simply leave, and dust off their feet. Both in reference to someone not willing to listen to truth. But in fact that poster did not debate their point ad nnauseum, they posted a post and made it so it was self-evident that it was the right way, which is wrong, then made it personal. There is little room for doubt that it was an insult to me.
 
Upvote 0
D

dies-l

Guest
And where have I said anything that disagrees with you regarding giving?

In all fairness, I don't know that you personally have said anything that has been a bone of contention. However, I have been told by others on this thread that voluntary tithing is legalistic and wrong. If you agree with this, then I disagree with you.


If you eye is dark, the whole body will be dark.

If I was one to get easily offended, I would find this no less offensive than the pearls and swine comment.

As for the swine, there is actually two references the poster was making. One regarding casting important things before pigs, another in regards to telling the disciples that if they find they aren't welcomed in a town, to simply leave, and dust off their feet. Both in reference to someone not willing to listen to truth. But in fact that poster did not debate their point ad nnauseum, they posted a post and made it so it was self-evident that it was the right way, which is wrong, then made it personal. There is little room for doubt that it was an insult to me.

I understand both references, and if you want to be hurt and offended by it, that is your choice.
 
Upvote 0

Svt4Him

Legend
Site Supporter
Oct 23, 2003
16,711
1,132
55
Visit site
✟121,118.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
If you eye is dark, the whole body will be dark.
If I was one to get easily offended, I would find this no less offensive than the pearls and swine comment

That is a Hebrew idiom that says if you are greedy, it controls your life. It is agreeing with your post. If you get offended, it is simply because you didn't understand the idiom, not because I was insulting you, as again it was in agreement with what you were saying. This hopefully explains the idiom:

Unfortunately, for many years translators and teachers have struggled with the Hebraic concept of the "evil eye." This idiom has created many problems, and has been misunderstood, because the Hebrew culture has been misunderstood. "The light of the body is the eye; If therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness," Matthew 6:22-23a, KJV.The people who heard Yahshua speak these very words immediately recognized what Yahshua meant when he talked of the evil eye.

This idea was and is common in the Hebraic culture. Yet, just pick up any different Bible translation and in it will be a quagmire of different words used to express this hidden Hebrew idiom. Each translation seems to deal with the issue differently. A few examples include, eye be whole, eye be simple, eye be sound, eye be plain, eye be healthy, sincere, clear, honest, or eye be good. This is very confusing! What did Yahshua really mean? Hebraically, what is an evil eye?
To answer these questions and bring clarity to this idiom, let's look at the context of Yahshua's words and consult two pillars of the Hebrew culture, the Tanakh and the Talmud.

First, let's look at the context. The very next verse after the evil eye quotation, explains exactly what the evil eye squints at. "But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness! No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both Elohim and Money," Matthew 6:23,24 NIV.

When he spoke of the bad eye, Yahshua wasn't talking about bad eye sight or the need for lasik surgery! From the context it is easy to grasp that Yahshua was using a Hebrew expression to comment on people's greed. Each time Yahshua spoke of the eye being good or evil, or "plucking out the eye," he was speaking of the issue of greed. An evil eye is a greedy eye. A person with an evil eye is controlled by the desire to receive for self.

From Hidden Hebrew Idioms

And finally, please don't put words in my mouth, I can do that well myself. I am not hurt or offended, calling a spade a spade is not an emotional response nor is it necessarily done out of that hurt or offense. If someone is rude, you don't have to be offended to notice it.

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,842
78
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,422.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
I don't give much to my local church. I give my time and energy as the treasurer and elder. But I will tell you that I was prompted to give my lunch money at a conference, and I got two lunches, a free evening meal, and a good sum of money for preaching on the Sunday. So, even though I don't believe in the prosperity doctrine where you have to give so much to God for Him to give back, He seemed to have given me back heaps more than I gave Him!

There was a guy in my church who gave me a hard time about the fact that I don't put much in the offering bag, so I told him next time I would put a photograph of a forgery of a $50 note in there. He didn't seem to worry me again...
 
Upvote 0
D

dies-l

Guest


That is a Hebrew idiom that says if you are greedy, it controls your life. It is agreeing with your post. If you get offended, it is simply because you didn't understand the idiom, not because I was insulting you, as again it was in agreement with what you were saying. This hopefully explains the idiom:

Unfortunately, for many years translators and teachers have struggled with the Hebraic concept of the "evil eye." This idiom has created many problems, and has been misunderstood, because the Hebrew culture has been misunderstood. "The light of the body is the eye; If therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness," Matthew 6:22-23a, KJV.The people who heard Yahshua speak these very words immediately recognized what Yahshua meant when he talked of the evil eye.

This idea was and is common in the Hebraic culture. Yet, just pick up any different Bible translation and in it will be a quagmire of different words used to express this hidden Hebrew idiom. Each translation seems to deal with the issue differently. A few examples include, eye be whole, eye be simple, eye be sound, eye be plain, eye be healthy, sincere, clear, honest, or eye be good. This is very confusing! What did Yahshua really mean? Hebraically, what is an evil eye?
To answer these questions and bring clarity to this idiom, let's look at the context of Yahshua's words and consult two pillars of the Hebrew culture, the Tanakh and the Talmud.

First, let's look at the context. The very next verse after the evil eye quotation, explains exactly what the evil eye squints at. "But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness! No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both Elohim and Money," Matthew 6:23,24 NIV.

When he spoke of the bad eye, Yahshua wasn't talking about bad eye sight or the need for lasik surgery! From the context it is easy to grasp that Yahshua was using a Hebrew expression to comment on people's greed. Each time Yahshua spoke of the eye being good or evil, or "plucking out the eye," he was speaking of the issue of greed. An evil eye is a greedy eye. A person with an evil eye is controlled by the desire to receive for self.

From Hidden Hebrew Idioms


Sorry if I misunderstood.

And finally, please don't put words in my mouth, I can do that well myself. I am not hurt or offended, calling a spade a spade is not an emotional response nor is it necessarily done out of that hurt or offense. If someone is rude, you don't have to be offended to notice it.

Meh. You seemed to feel a need to point it out. But, if you are not hurt or offended, I am glad about that. Life is too short to be offended. :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0
D

dies-l

Guest
I don't give much to my local church.


Just out of curiosity: why not?

I give my time and energy as the treasurer and elder.

Given this role, I would think you, as much as anyone would know the financial needs of your church. I don't mean to give you a hard time, but it just seems odd to me that a treasurer and elder would admittedly not give much financially.

But I will tell you that I was prompted to give my lunch money at a conference, and I got two lunches, a free evening meal, and a good sum of money for preaching on the Sunday. So, even though I don't believe in the prosperity doctrine where you have to give so much to God for Him to give back, He seemed to have given me back heaps more than I gave Him!

I used to be in the "tithing doesn't apply to me" camp, and then, thanks to my wife, I discovered the concept of voluntary tithing (giving at least 10% of my income because I want to, not because I have to). The kinds of blessings you have described here are quite similar to what I have seen all around my life as a regular giver. I don't buy into the prosperity gospel either; I am not rich by American standards, and I have no desire to be. But, I have found that there is a great connection between generosity and contentment. And, I also believe that if the local church is doing what it is supposed to be doing, a generous heart will want to support it. And, if the local church is not doing what it is supposed to be doing, the faithful should flee from it or change it.
 
Upvote 0

Jerushabelle

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
3,244
584
✟6,072.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
You can't post that often enough, Svt4Him. It's a great passage also on the issue of alcoholic beverages-- even strong ones! There's just no avoiding the fact that the tithe was to be used for the benefit of the tithers in a feast before God, and to feed those who had no means of feeding themselves because they had no land and cattle and crops. Funny how the OT is fine when quoting a snippet of Malachi, but not Deuteronomy.

I didn't mention Deuteronomy but it is God's word in regard to the festival and welfare tithe. It does not negate His word as found in Malachi. The crux of the problem here, in my estimation, is that there are some who choose to accept what God has to say throughout all Scripture and some who choose to accept what they choose to accept. Likewise the acceptance that a Levite (a priest/servant of God and the Temple) is the same as a Pastor.

And since you complain so, regarding the little of Malachi that I posted, let me enlighten you further from God's word through Malachi:
"'See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come,' says the Lord Almighty. But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner's fire or a launderer's soap. He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; he will purify the Levites and refine them like gold and silver. Then the Lord will have men who will bring offerings in righteousness, and the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem will be acceptable to the Lord, as in days gone by, as in former years. 'So I will come near to you for judgment. I will be quick to testify against sorcerers, adulterers and perjurers, against those who defraud laborers of their wages, who oppress the widows and the fatherless, and deprive aliens of justice, but do not fear me,' says the Lord Almighty."

In this Scripture God is speaking through Malachi of Jesus' second coming, and that God will have men bring in offerings by those whom Jesus purified which will be deemed acceptable. The welfare tithe is meant to provide a wage for the Levites/Pastors, laborers in God's service and widows and orphans; the needy. What does God say about those who defraud laborers of their wages and oppress widows and fatherless by withholding the tithe which benefits them and what does God say about those who do not fear Him? That He will be quick to testify against them.
 
Upvote 0

Mr. Donut

Active Member
Jun 18, 2011
227
103
U.S. of A.
✟822.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Leviticus 27.30:
All tithes from the land, whether the seed from the ground or the fruit from the tree, are the Lord’s; they are holy to the Lord.



Leviticus 27.31:
If persons wish to redeem any of their tithes, they must add one-fifth to them.



Leviticus 27.32:
All tithes of herd and flock, every tenth one that passes under the shepherd’s staff, shall be holy to the Lord.



Numbers 18.21:
To the Levites I have given every tithe in Israel for a possession in return for the service that they perform, the service in the tent of meeting.



Numbers 18.24:
because I have given to the Levites as their portion the tithe of the Israelites, which they set apart as an offering to the Lord. Therefore I have said of them that they shall have no allotment among the Israelites.



Numbers 18.26:
You shall speak to the Levites, saying: When you receive from the Israelites the tithe that I have given you from them for your portion, you shall set apart an offering from it to the Lord, a tithe of the tithe.



Numbers 18.28:
Thus you also shall set apart an offering to the Lord from all the tithes that you receive from the Israelites; and from them you shall give the Lord’s offering to the priest Aaron.



Deuteronomy 12.6:
bringing there your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices, your tithes and your donations, your votive gifts, your freewill-offerings, and the firstlings of your herds and flocks.



Deuteronomy 12.11:
then you shall bring everything that I command you to the place that the Lord your God will choose as a dwelling for his name: your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices, your tithes and your donations, and all your choice votive gifts that you vow to the Lord.



Deuteronomy 12.17:
Nor may you eat within your towns the tithe of your grain, your wine, or your oil, the firstlings of your herds or your flocks, any of your votive gifts that you vow, your freewill-offerings, or your donations;



Deuteronomy 14.22:
Set apart a tithe of all the yield of your seed that is brought in yearly from the field.



Deuteronomy 14.23:
In the presence of the Lord your God, in the place that he will choose as a dwelling for his name, you shall eat the tithe of your grain, your wine, and your oil, as well as the firstlings of your herd and flock, so that you may learn to fear the Lord your God always.



Deuteronomy 14.28:
Every third year you shall bring out the full tithe of your produce for that year, and store it within your towns;



Deuteronomy 26.1:
When you have come into the land that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance to possess, and you possess it, and settle in it,



Deuteronomy 26.12:
When you have finished paying all the tithe of your produce in the third year (which is the year of the tithe), giving it to the Levites, the aliens, the orphans, and the widows, so that they may eat their fill within your towns,



2 Chronicles 31.5:
As soon as the word spread, the people of Israel gave in abundance the first fruits of grain, wine, oil, honey, and of all the produce of the field; and they brought in abundantly the tithe of everything.



2 Chronicles 31.6:
The people of Israel and Judah who lived in the cities of Judah also brought in the tithe of cattle and sheep, and the tithe of the dedicated things that had been consecrated to the Lord their God, and laid them in heaps.



2 Chronicles 31.12:
Faithfully they brought in the contributions, the tithes and the dedicated things. The chief officer in charge of them was Conaniah the Levite, with his brother Shimei as second;



Nehemiah 10.37:
and to bring the first of our dough, and our contributions, the fruit of every tree, the wine and the oil, to the priests, to the chambers of the house of our God; and to bring to the Levites the tithes from our soil, for it is the Levites who collect the tithes in all our rural towns.



Nehemiah 10.38:
And the priest, the descendant of Aaron, shall be with the Levites when the Levites receive the tithes; and the Levites shall bring up a tithe of the tithes to the house of our God, to the chambers of the storehouse.



Nehemiah 12.44:
On that day men were appointed over the chambers for the stores, the contributions, the first fruits, and the tithes, to gather into them the portions required by the law for the priests and for the Levites from the fields belonging to the towns; for Judah rejoiced over the priests and the Levites who ministered.



Nehemiah 13.5:
prepared for Tobiah a large room where they had previously put the grain-offering, the frankincense, the vessels, and the tithes of grain, wine, and oil, which were given by commandment to the Levites, singers, and gatekeepers, and the contributions for the priests.



Nehemiah 13.12:
Then all Judah brought the tithe of the grain, wine, and oil into the storehouses.



Amos 4.4:
Come to Bethel—and transgress;
to Gilgal—and multiply transgression;
bring your sacrifices every morning,
your tithes every three days;


Malachi 3.8:
Will anyone rob God? Yet you are robbing me! But you say, ‘How are we robbing you?’ In your tithes and offerings!



Malachi 3.10:
Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, so that there may be food in my house, and thus put me to the test, says the Lord of hosts; see if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you an overflowing blessing.



Tobit 1.6:
But I alone went often to Jerusalem for the festivals, as it is prescribed for all Israel by an everlasting decree. I would hurry off to Jerusalem with the first fruits of the crops and the firstlings of the flock, the tithes of the cattle, and the first shearings of the sheep.



Judith 11.13:
They have decided to consume the first fruits of the grain and the tithes of the wine and oil, which they had consecrated and set aside for the priests who minister in the presence of our God in Jerusalem—things it is not lawful for any of the people even to touch with their hands.



Ecclesiasticus 35.11:
With every gift show a cheerful face,
and dedicate your tithe with gladness.


1 Maccabees 3.49:
They also brought the vestments of the priesthood and the first fruits and the tithes, and they stirred up the nazirites who had completed their days;



1 Maccabees 10.31:
Jerusalem and its environs, its tithes and its revenues, shall be holy and free from tax.



1 Maccabees 11.35:
And the other payments henceforth due to us of the tithes, and the taxes due to us, and the salt pits and the crown taxes due to us—from all these we shall grant them release.



Matthew 23.23:
‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint, dill, and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. It is these you ought to have practiced without neglecting the others.



Luke 11.42:
‘But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and herbs of all kinds, and neglect justice and the love of God; it is these you ought to have practiced, without neglecting the others.



Hebrews 7.5:
And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to collect tithes from the people, that is, from their kindred, though these also are descended from Abraham.



Hebrews 7.6:
But this man, who does not belong to their ancestry, collected tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had received the promises.



Hebrews 7.8:
In the one case, tithes are received by those who are mortal; in the other, by one of whom it is testified that he lives.



Hebrews 7.9:
One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham,



1 Corinthians 9.2-12
2If I am not an apostle to others, at least I am to you; for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
3 This is my defense to those who would examine me. 4Do we not have the right to our food and drink? 5Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a believing wife,* as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? 6Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living? 7Who at any time pays the expenses for doing military service? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat any of its fruit? Or who tends a flock and does not get any of its milk?
8 Do I say this on human authority? Does not the law also say the same? 9For it is written in the law of Moses, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.’ Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10Or does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was indeed written for our sake, for whoever plows should plow in hope and whoever threshes should thresh in hope of a share in the crop. 11If we have sown spiritual good among you, is it too much if we reap your material benefits? 12If others share this rightful claim on you, do not we still more?
Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ.



Malachi 3.8:
Will anyone rob God?
Yet you are robbing me!
But you say, ‘How are we robbing you?’
In your tithes and offerings!



How was the Tent of Meeting built?
Was it not by the contributions of the people?


How was The Temple built?
Was it not also through the money given to God by the people?


How are churches to exist without the support of the members?


Is not the worker worth his wage?
Paul clearly shows us that the pastor is to be paid for his work, so why argue?


If we neglect the church who will be there to help/feed/clothe the poor?
The government? The number of homeless should show it has failed.
If not the church then will you?
Will you serve the needs of the poor today?
The sick? Those in prison? Those dying?
If you are not serving, who will?
Is that not the calling of the church?
Are these not the services of the pastor?
If the worker is worth his wage, why begrudge the pastor?


2 Corinthians 9.7: Each of you must give as you have made up your mind, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.


This is not to be viewed as a license for anyone to refrain from giving, we are all called to give.
We are called to give without reservation and without dispute.
So why is there so much dispute over giving?
Is it because some value money more than God?
The rich man in Matthew 19:16-22, how would his life have been changed if only he had given?
How much do we give?
How much did Yeshua give?
Can we out give Him?


1 Corinthians 16:1-4,
16Now concerning the collection for the saints: you should follow the directions I gave to the churches of Galatia. 2On the first day of every week, each of you is to put aside and save whatever extra you earn, so that collections need not be taken when I come. 3And when I arrive, I will send any whom you approve with letters to take your gift to Jerusalem. 4If it seems advisable that I should go also, they will accompany me.


Now this collection was for whom?
Was this not to care for the poor? The orphans? The widows?
Yes all these and more, the church leaders were also supported through these weekly collections.



All Scripture is quoted from the NRSV.
 
Upvote 0

Svt4Him

Legend
Site Supporter
Oct 23, 2003
16,711
1,132
55
Visit site
✟121,118.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
How was The Temple built?
Was it not also through the money given to God by the people?- a freewill offering, where everyone gave as their heart led them.


How are churches to exist without the support of the members?- need doesn't dictate doctrine. Not only that, but are you a member of a church, or are you the church who gets together with other likeminded believers?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.